I don't think the drop from $6.5 million to $1.5 million in 2 years is allowed, but other than that it's what I'd expect his next contract to look like. It's no more egregious than the other retirement contracts that have been accepted. He does have a higher top salary than the other contracts, so the difference from high to low is greater, but it's still consistent with the salaries of players at that age. Nobody expects Kovalchuk to be superman when he's 40 years old, so he'd be paid like any of the other guys who last until they're 40.

The NHL "investigating" those other contracts could be an issue. They need to hurry up with those investigations, because the Devils need to know what is allowed.

My guess all along had been that Lou had a 15 year contract negotiated and ready to be signed if they lost the arbitration (which I figured would happen).

If that doesn't happen soon, I'll start to question whether Lou actually wants Kovalchuk (at least at a price that Kovalchuk would be willing to live with).

And if the NHL is really seriously investigating the other front-loaded contracts, Lou might have screwed himself out of the opportunity to slip one in under the acceptable limit. 44 was clearly too far, but 42 wasn't too far. Now 42 might even be too far. But if the NHL tries to do that, this could end up in a real court.

For the millionth time, THE PRONGER DEAL IS IRRELEVANT IN THIS DISCUSSION since it is a 35+ contract and the cap hit stays if he retires or is sent down to the minors.

But if he's traded it goes against the receiving team's salary cap, right? He would be very appealing to a team that wants to stay above the salary floor, save a ton of money and get a veteran defenseman for a year.

One team uses him while his cap hit is lower than it should be, another team uses him when it's higher than it should be. It's twice as bad! (not really, but it's still at least kind of bad)